fletcher wrote:Ubuntu seems to have shot themselves in the foot with Unity. I have barely used it, since I did not like Ubuntu when I first used it three years ago, which is why I am on Mint. But from what I have read and seen on blogs all over the web, people do not like Unity. It is, apparently, not as user friendly, and I personally think it unattractive. Feel free to disagree with me on either of those points. One of the great things abotu Linux, in my opinion, is the disagreement. It helps build stronger distros, and expand usage.

Then there is Mint. Mint was started to be a usable distribution that could appeal to a lot of people. And it has only gotten better at that. MATE and Cinnamon are perfect examples. I never liked Gnome at all, and went with xfce, then LXDE, when I came to Mint. But I like Cinnamon, and t is now my desktop of choice. It made a convert of me, and I only tried it because Mint discontinued my DE of choice. And from all reports, MATE is a great DE, too. So instead of creating an unpopular DE that seems to be more tuned for touch screen, such as Ubuntu did, the Mint developers found and made good replacements for Gnome. Better than the original, in fact. Mint is also noob friendly, as it is set up to be easy to use. I never thougth the same about Ubuntu, even on 9.04. Mint can be used and learned pretty painlessly by new Linux users. So can many other distributions, like ZOrin and Zeven and others, but I have found Mint to be by far the best and easiest to make your own.

I definitely understand that the money issue goes to MS and Apple. They make products and they have customer support services.

Linux as a product is a solid product. BAnd the biggest service that I can think of off the top of my head is Linux Administrator. But because it is specialized skill, HR has to have a keen sense of who is worthy enough to hire as a Linux Administrator and how much they are truly worth to the company.

Another example of paid work is developers and programmers. Programmers can always prove themselves via open source development. Thus raising their stock in the open programming job market.

As far as tangible products are concerned that is certainly limited for Linux due to the nature of GNU.

On the flip side, Apple from my observations make a lot of their income from hardware design which caters to their own software. I believe that is a distinct advantage over Microsoft which is hisyorically built as a software company. I believe the UEFI issue will be interesting but I have a hard time believing that Linux users will be forced by BIOS engineers to purchase a key code. We will see.

But getting back to the original topic of this thread, Linux Mints most redeeming value is the ease of use for newbie converts.

Now I speak mainly for myself when I say that I was only really dependent on Microsoft because first, Apple is too expensive for my overall budget and I didn't know the Linux paradigm and the only real way to learn Linux is to wipe out Windows and immerse myself in an easy but stable Linux distro. Linux Mint does that. And as I research the LM OS I am wondering if it is customizable for a motivated enthusiast to match the high level specs demanded by high level software programs. Yhat still remains to be seen.

As far as the money issue is concerned, the politics behind corporate decision making can get very complicated to the point where share holder satisfaction is at times more important than innovation.

Take your pick, i suppose.

If maximum monetary reward is what you want then the fact remains that the computer industry isn't the only industry where you can make a lot of money. If that is what you are focused on.

I enjoy building computer software and hardware and experimenting with technology. I have other ways of paying the rent and putting food on the table. And I am not interested in purchasing MS and Mac products that were designed more to make me dependent on continuously paying for updates and security measures and other products and services like a slave.

animaguy wrote:And what I find hilarious is Linux is far more powerful than What Mac and Microsoft have to offer cause their development is based on what sells versus what works.

Not exactly true. the development of the concept of WYSIWYG was a major selling factor in the editing industry. Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark express are still the tools of choices in the world of edition. And in the web edition market, Apple is a major player. The Mac look likes big toys, but the software for edition on this platform is the best.

When I say Apple is on top of the world, I am refering to their company as a whole. Not just their operating system.

But you make a good point about DirectX in Windows. Windows does have DirectX gaming cornered as a market. I certainly agree with that. For developers on Linux however, that is fertile ground. I am not sure but my understanding is Collada is supposed to be the answer for DirectX.

Asimov wrote:Not exactly true. the development of the concept of WYSIWYG was a major selling factor in the editing industry. Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark express are still the tools of choices in the world of edition. And in the web edition market, Apple is a major player. The Mac look likes big toys, but the software for edition on this platform is the best.

I worked with Photoshop and Illustrator and yes they do hold a strong place in their respective purposes. Never worked with Quark.

When you say WYSIWYG, I personally have outgrown that concept. I did find Dreamweaver to be a great achievment but I have to admit that for me it isn't worth the hassle. I prefer Eclipse. Eclipse does fine with me.

For simple stuff Gimp works for me. I use Blender and love it. Maya and 3DMax aren't even part of the equation on this issue.

WYSIWYG was a selling point for beginner web designers but for coders who want to last, knowing how to read lines of codes and distinguish patterns and how to conceptualize how those patterns are translated to the finished product makes the concept of WYSIWYG an unnecessary crutch. It is just a selling point and not a long term feature.

I won't pay for a program just because of some WYSIWYG feature. And the only reason why I paid it in the past was because Linux and open source weren't advanced enough to compete with Apple and MS.

I believe they are now. And Linux and the GNU community is steadily catching up.

When I say Apple is on top of the world, I am refering to their company as a whole. Not just their operating system.

But you make a good point about DirectX in Windows. Windows does have DirectX gaming cornered as a market. I certainly agree with that. For developers on Linux however, that is fertile ground. I am not sure but my understanding is Collada is supposed to be the answer for DirectX.

Windows 8 might be the turning point, like you say. Valve's Gabe Newell called Win8 a 'catastrophe' and wants to put more support behind Linux. The next few of years are going to be interesting IMO.

animaguy wrote:WYSIWYG was a selling point for beginner web designers but for coders who want to last.

there many concept that you should explored. The API of MACOX is the most advance interface in the world of computer. If you had done some programming, your are familiar with the "events". I bet that you have never see an API with "network events".

Asimov, I do not know what qualifies for advanced interface for Mac OS as being the most advanced interface.

I only consider that an OS is a container that houses functionality. I certainly believe Mac holds a respected position in hardware design used in conjunction and exclusively with it's proprietary OSX. However when it cones to choosing an OS for high powered usage linux still wins.

Mac certainly has a top spot with consumers who can afford the price and like a high level of user friendliness. I completely agree with that. I can even agree that the API is complex because proprietary software has to compete with non proprietary developers but that is far as I will go.

Linux is much leaner an open for innovation and high level applicability.

Mac OS up until this point has done a respectable job of avoiding bloat but it will always be held back because resources have to be devoted to protect its proprietary properties.

Linux can always be adjusted to meet the individual purposes of it's users.

bimsebasse wrote:If a major mainstream breakthrough happens it won't be with either Mint or Ubuntu, it will be ChromeOS or Android desktopified, there can be no doubt about that.

I suspect you may be right. 90% of what most people do and need are through a web browser. Huge underlying operating systems, tons of hard drive space, I suspect will be a diminishing presence in the future. I think what helps Linux is that the excuses for not using it are also diminishing. If all you really need is a browser and access to the web--why not use Linux? What need is there for Windows? I would be really worried if I had MS stock right now. Apple is going to do just fine because they have a locked down system with many fans and it works across various devices. Also they have lots of content, and as you see with Amazon and their tablet success--people want content. Regarding Mint, I think it's a mistake if they don't focus more on their Debian editions and reconsider the base Debian system and the way updates are handled. Debian editions are free of the Ubuntu bloat, run on low spec hardware, and if Mint ever gets into Tablets it will likely be via Debian (LMDE). I'm most impressed with the Mint Maya Xfce edition right now. It is the lightest Mint Ubuntu based version, and yet has 5 years LTS support that even Xubuntu 12.04 doesn't have. I have big concerns about Gnome, and wonder what Mint might have done if they just focused on an Xfce Ubuntu-based edition, and put more resources into LMDE. Imagine using a LMDE Xfce tweaked version on Tablets. I think if they could keep Gnome from breaking Cinnamon, and get it running faster with more features, a Cinnamon LMDE would look good on a tablet.